Network Guides

Establish the right context: public chains

When a request involves public chains, slow the decision down enough to identify what it changes, which network it relies on, and whether EVM can be independently verified.

The same term can behave differently across networks or DApps, so public chains should always be interpreted in context. EVM provides a second verification angle, while Layer 2 helps confirm what actually happened afterward. Network-specific rules should be checked against trustworthy information for that network.

The purpose of learning Network Guides is to understand the action rather than mechanically complete it. Whenever public chains, EVM, or the expected result cannot be explained, preserve the option to decline, exit, or verify again later.

Understand how it works in practice: EVM

How EVM, Layer 2, and gas relate in practice

A practical way to approach EVM is to place it inside a real task and start with Layer 2.

If an interface mixes several layers of information, check EVM, Layer 2, and gas separately. Names, icons, and familiar layouts are presentation details, not substitutes for the actual network, address, contract, or on-chain state. When the evidence conflicts, fewer new actions usually make troubleshooting easier.

Over time, revisit EVM and Layer 2, remove connections or permissions that are no longer needed, and keep the device and browser environment trustworthy. Security is not an absolute promise; it is a process of reducing secret exposure, mistaken approvals, and avoidable uncertainty.

• Confirm the real object behind EVM
• Check the network or permission scope for Layer 2
• Use gas or another public record to verify the result
• Never share a seed phrase, private key or verification code

Review the action step by step: Layer 2

Layer 2 is easy to misunderstand when context is missing. The account, gas, and the intended action should agree before a familiar interface is treated as meaningful evidence.

For Network Guides, a repeatable verification habit is more durable than memorizing where a button appears. Check Layer 2, then gas, and finally confirmations. Interfaces can change and network conditions can move, while the reasoning behind those checks remains useful.

Keep the security boundary explicit: the user controls the seed phrase and private keys, and imtoken will never ask for them. If a third party links Layer 2 to a request for recovery secrets or verification codes, stop. When gas is involved, also verify the address, network, amount or permission scope.

Recognize common mistakes and risks: gas

How gas, confirmations, and public chains relate in practice

Within Network Guides, gas is not an isolated term; it affects confirmations and the on-chain result a user eventually sees.

A useful review order is source, object, request, and result. The source establishes where the action came from, gas identifies the object, and confirmations clarifies the scope. After submission, keep a transaction hash or other public record so that changing status can be checked again without relying on one interface message.

If a result differs from expectations, record gas, confirmations, and other non-secret evidence, then reconstruct the sequence of actions. Never send recovery secrets to someone offering to “restore” or “verify” an account, and avoid untrusted remote-control software.

• Confirm the real object behind gas
• Check the network or permission scope for confirmations
• Use public chains or another public record to verify the result
• Never share a seed phrase, private key or verification code

Build a repeatable verification habit: confirmations

When using Network Guides, first identify whether the current object is an account, asset, network, transaction or permission. Then relate confirmations to public chains instead of reading either label alone.

Do not treat “already connected,” “used before,” or “looks familiar” as sufficient evidence. Review confirmations for the actual object, public chains for the transaction or permission boundary, and EVM for the resulting state. If one step remains unclear, declining is a valid outcome.

Verification continues after submission. Keep public evidence related to confirmations and use public chains to review status when necessary. On-chain transactions generally cannot be reversed by a wallet provider alone, and third-party DApps or contracts can carry their own risks, so blind resubmission is a poor troubleshooting method.